According to the neighbourhood letter I received today, objections should be in by 19th February although there are indications they will still be accepted after that.
Send your email to firstname.lastname@example.org
with the reference number - 14/00293/MAO
Valid objections according to the GAG website can be:
What are valid objections?The following is a list of the main issues. Any or all of these can be included in your letter of objection and you are able to send in additional letters if you feel you wish to raise another issue. As new issues arise we will post them here and we will be creating Microsoft Word templates that you can download or you can cut and paste from below. It helps if you use your own words to begin and end your letter and to alter our list below into your own words.
- the development of the site for housing is not necessary to meet current housing requirements.
- the traffic generation from up to some 400 dwellings (plus potentially an additional 26 dwellings on adjacent site Ref S/H2.10) cannot satisfactorily be accommodated in the local highway network.
- a 2-lane swing bridge of the stated dimensions cannot satisfactorily serve a site of this size. Queuing and disruption on both bridge approaches will be the result of:
- inadequate bridge carriageway width (4.8m compared with a standard width of 5.5m)
- mechanical breakdowns
- plannned maintenance
- boat passage (approx 15 openings per day in season)
- the development will cause irreparable harm to the attractive landscape and visual character of the area.
- the development will cause irreparable harm to the archaeology and cultural heritage of the locality.
- the upheaval caused by significant civil engineering works and the lengthy building programme is environmentally unacceptable.
- the it has not been satisfactorily determined that there is sufficient capacity in the existing sewerage system to cope with the additional foul drainage discharge.
- the site is not readily accessible by public transport.
- The visibility at the junction of Oakwood Drive and lady lane is in adequate and substandard as required by the Manual for Streets recommendations.
- The design of the part-time signals proposed at Oakwood Drive/Lady Lane is inherently flawed from a safety aspect i.e. restricted footway facilities and an increased level of exposure resulting in consequential accidents/collisions involving pedestrians.
- Oakwood Drive is designed for a maximum of 200 dwellings (as demonstrated by the applicant’s additional 22 units). It is NOT suitable for the traffic that will be generated by an additional 400+ dwellings (plus the existing traffic from Airedale Mills and Micklethwaite), even in an emergency situation. (The new application supposedly addresses this by having some sort of automated system for opening the bollards in emergency - still woefully inadequate)